User talk:SafariScribe/Archive 9

This week's article for improvement (week 37, 2024)

Map of the Caroline Islands Archipelago

Hello, SafariScribe. The article for improvement of the week is:

Please be bold and help improve it!

Previous selections: Cancel culture • Once Upon a Time in the West

Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot ^talk 00:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • Opt-out instructions[reply]

Question from Happydays2024 on Wikipedia:Writing better articles (21:36, 8 September 2024)

How do I create certain things --Happydays2024 (talk) 21:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Happydays2024 and welcome to Wikipedia. Creating things, you mean articles?

Before writing on a topic including another person's biography, please browse very well about the thing and make sure it meets WP:GNG or any specific WP:SNG. Sources are various means of knowing how notable a thing could be, hence they should fall under WP:RS and are usually newspapers, national TV/Radio station news, peer reviewed journals, e.t.c. To have an initial guide to writing on Wikipedia, see our various articles: HELP:YFA. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 03:59, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Logan Henderson (engineer) rejection

I've studied your rejection and the putative notability of Henderson, looking particularly at the version you rejected as lacking notability.

I am puzzled. Henderson's notability is sufficiently established in that version by this reference. With the notability established I believe that this revision stood a better than 50% chance of surviving am immediate deletion process. Thus acceptance ought to have been the route forward rather than rejection. Had you been, as I presume you to have been, in doubt, then a decline would have been a better route than rejection.

I think this review was an error. You may wish to talk to the creating editor and to discuss your thought processes. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would have rechecked but thank God it has been accepted. Mistakes happen but I should be extremely careful. Cheers! [since yesterday, my technology have been saying, likely: "WP is down" and I couldn't respond because its an issue with the technology here] Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:09, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Torch Electronics

Hello can you provide some more clarity on the reason for denial. I know it mentioned something about high quality sources but also relevance. I think I have a decent amount of diverse sources and the company is very germane to Missouri Politics especially this upcoming election. Thanks! Draft:Torch_Electronics IRT787 (talk) 04:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft should meet WP:NCORP before it will get accepted into the article namespace. In its current form, my denial reason was explicit and you should attempt reading them all while clicking the links to help you. Being involved in politics doesn't always make a company notable, and your drats contains WP:PEACOCK terms that sounds like a promotional draft. Incase you want to continue writing here, you may like to read Wikipedia:WORDSTOWATCH. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:47, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At the risk of sounding a little rude, did you read the draft? I think the valid criticism would be that's it's actually too negative and certainly not puffery. I think that a major controversy of unregulated gambling machines at nearly every gas station in the state is a major issue and something that the public should be able to find more information about the company here on Wikipedia. Not to mention the political controversy of the attorney general dropping the lawsuit after receiving financial contributions from the company in question.

There are at least three separate major regional news outlets listed in the references and can add more if needed. IRT787 (talk) 22:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have resubmitted the draft, @IRT787, and I'm sorry for, to you, being a bit rude. However, that's my reason for declining your draft. Better sources, ofcourse, will be good if added, but I am not certain your draft meets WP:NCORP. Good luck! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:12, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Ali Zulfikar zahedi declined

Dear

I would be proud to get help and kind hand if you put into this article to make it live. I am new here then I must need help from you. My first article Ali Zulfikar Zahedi , who is a film director and seen in internet having many activities on his. Thus, I feel a good article could be in Wikipedia. Looking for your kind support that it has been declined by you. Could you please look on to and I might miss reliable source but in internet it has many coverage but as a new I am not sure which source will be appropriate. Looking for your kind hand on this article Burdubai007 (talk) 07:57, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please link the draft here! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Ali Zulfikar Zahedi Burdubai007 (talk) 16:59, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SafariScribe, most likely sock puppetry involved here, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kagoz. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 20:16, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, @আফতাবুজ্জামান. Your draft should meet WP:NDIRECTOR before it will be accepted into the article mainspace, @Burdubai007. Cite reliable sources that can be used to explicitly verify that he directed all those films as listed in the draft
Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:17, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article marked for deletion

Hey there SafariScribe -- I'm new to this whole thing and want my work to be as useful as possible. I see you marked my new page for Stephen-Craig Aristei as an article for deletion -- wanted to see what I need to do to have it remain. All the best. Rkg5514 (talk) 13:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, unfortunately, I can't do anything for you but will be neutral with your question. It's always good to research very well about a topic (person) before writing about them. It's mostly good to ask question as WP:GNG may vary from any editor's reading. That been said, your article doesn't meet WP:GNG or specifically,~~WP:NAUTHOR and WP:NMUSICIAN~~ WP:NCREATIVE. You should note that adding WP:LOTSOFSOURCES may still add no notability. I would want you to pay attention to the consensus -to-meet (WP:AFD), which is ongoing to hear from different opinions. Please do not Wikipedia:BLUDGEON. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:11, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding so quickly. As this individual is a music publisher and manager, rather than any kind of creative professional, I am not sure that WP:NAUTHOR applies in this instance. Same for WP:MUSICIAN as this person is not a musician, but rather an associated individual on the business side of the industry... Rkg5514 (talk) 15:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will support userfying (turning into a draft) your article to help you learn how Wikipedia works and because I can't determine the SNG to use for a better explanation if not WP:NCREATIVE. As a music publisher, we can say that the article should have worked with musicians and it should depend on the music he has published. I also will value WP:NAUTHOR because part is writing is publishing. However, the most way of representing this is WP:CREATIVE. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speed of progress

We have had this discussion before. Please slow down still further. You have editors asking you questions about your reviews, questions you appear to have left unanswered. We must be able to justify our reviews. Unwillingness or inability to do so may disqualify us from the review process. Please take note of this thought, catch up on your backlog of unanswered questions, and reduce your speed. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Backlog of unanswered questions. Really? Ofcourse I always answer and I have always been accountable for my reviews. And I've been thinking about your accountability question. It's either I have sorted it out with the editor or have done so somewhere. Please recheck and tell me if it's also mandatory to answer a request that is off my reviews at AFC. I sometimes help out but not to all. This type of words are strong and possibly because I don't come to AFC help desk; that I will add to my daily task. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What I am looking at is perception. It may be that you have not been online to answer, but even a small number of questions is perceived as too many when they are outstanding. Without naming you, your review(s) have been discussed at WT:AFC in a light that caused me to find the draft spoken of, revert your review, and accept it. I don't want you to be discussed in any light except a golden one, a positive one.

You are, almost always, a good and diligent reviewer. Please keep to the highest standards. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:00, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What I do sometimes if a query was answered elsewhere is add a note to the query on my tp stating it was answered elsewhere (i.e. answered at the Teahouse). One, as a note to myself so down the road I know why I did not respond but also so anyone looking at my tp knows the query was addressed.

Also, Safari I highly recommend for the most part not reviewing a draft more than once. Overall, I think additional eyes are helpful either because I may have made an error, another reviewer may hold a different opinion based on their experience (either to accept or provide better advice if it is still a decline) or another reviewer may be knowledgeable about the topic/willing to do work to get it over the line for acceptance. Sometimes even in instances where I know a draft does not and likely cannot meet notability I may leave it for another reviewer because hearing from someone else bolsters the draft does not meet the criteria so the creator (or anyone else) does not think it is only me who holds that opinion. There is a discussion at WT:AFC#Multiple rejections by same reviewer? and while not written into the instructions, it does appear to be standard practice. S0091 (talk) 15:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And while I here, are there any particular topics in which you have expertise or enjoy reviewing? If so, if I come across any I can ping you to have a look. There's a few editors I do that with (ex. for food topics I ping valereee, American football Beaniefan11, etc.). S0091 (talk) 16:31, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes Tim will appear formal with his advice and harsh-to-do-good encouragement likewise you, S0091, that whenever you encourage me, I will leave the philosophy booklet I may be reading or any other and smile for a while. Thank you so so much. I enjoy reviewing anything but mostly church, films (actors and actresses) and literature. I won't probably say this one but gossip won't leave me. Do you know you are good for the mop? (please only you should see this and don't tell anybody I said so. 😂) Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! You are funny Safari. :) S0091 (talk) 17:54, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article: Karin van der Laag

Good Day safariScribe

As you know the page which was written about me by someone else, was removed and since then I have been invited to re-write it eventhough writing articles about oneself is discouraged. As mentioned, my first page was not written by me, it appeared from another writer, whom I don't know and was then deleted. I searched for my page again and found it to be up and intact but written in Hausa, a language of Chad. How do i go about re-instating the page in English: or will I still have to start form scratch and rewrite my page. I have started a new draft page but have not submitted it for review yet.

Your advice please?

Kind Regards

Karin van der Laag Karinvanderlaag (talk) 11:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Karinvanderlaag (talk page watcher) you may request the undeletion of the original if you feel it is justified. You will need to lodge a WP:Deletion review because it was deleted by consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karin Van Der Laag. The rationale must be a technical one. The steps are defined for you there.

Draft:Karin van der Laag will need to demonstrate that it is substantially different from the deleted article to be accepted.

@SafariScribe there is substantial history on this editor's talk page whch will inform your response. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:02, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I have just had to add to that talk page warnings about breaches of WP:PAID, and WP:Edit war, while giving advice for the to read WP:3RR 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No article on Wikipedia is above deletion but any page, can avoid being deleted if it meets WP:N. @Karinvanderlaag, that you have edited other people's article doesn't mean you too should be justified having one, No!, it doesn't work out that way. Tim has completely advised you and believe me, if you have attained notability, an article will be created for you, it is a matter of little time. Please always know that writing autobiography here isn't always advisable and you should desist from writing one especially about yourself. And if you continue (to do so), then there would be a need for than. Just remain a faithful editor and fully understand how Wikipedia works. Cheers!

P.S. Your draft isn't yet written well for publication and per WP:IMDB, the site isn'tñ reliable. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 13:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. I was just surprised as I did a good edit on it for over two hours and now all the information seems to be gone. I believe I forgot to delete the paid contributor section on my talk page. I thought that this just applied to the other pages and not to Karin van der Laag. Karinvanderlaag (talk) 13:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I do not believe I am justified in having a page. I had a page. Many colleagues with less notability than I do have a page. I am just trying to re-instate the page and make it better than whoever put it up there in the first place. I did 2 hours of edits which are now all gone. I am not sure why? Could you explain this to me? Karinvanderlaag (talk) 13:40, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Karinvanderlaag Your last saved edit on Draft:Karin van der Laag was at 16:11, 4 July 2024‎, thus I doubt that this is what you refer to. If it is then you failed to click the button to save your work. If I edit for more than 10 minutes I save my work every 10 minutes or more frequently. This is normal practice when editing locally on on your client. It is more important still when editing across thousands of miles on a remote server located heaven knows where.

I'm sorry that your effort was wasted.

Now, you say "I do not believe I am justified in having a page." The deletiioimn discussion where it was deleted did not believe it either. I suggest you stop trying to force your way into Wikipedia. Write about something else, anything else.

Your deletion review has no rationale for any review, and will fail because of that lack. My opinion there will stand even if you provide a rationale. Deletion review only handles technical matters about the close. I suggested you read it all carefully, and it appears that you did not follow it as closely as you needed to do. I predict that this one will close speedily as 'no case to answer'. I also appear to be the only participant in the deletion discussion whom you invited. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Day

Where will I find articles to edit, basically concerning English grammar issues? I would like to start editing those. I see that there are random articles offered up for edit, but is there a specific way of getting to articles, that just need grammar cleanup?

Thanks Karin Karinvanderlaag (talk) 05:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Karinvanderlaag, you can pick a particular type of grammar cleanup from the rather overwhelming list at WP:TASK. Copy editing specifically is at Category:All articles needing copy edit. I recommend Category:Wikipedia introduction cleanup if you're interested in writing but don't want to do any research. -- asilvering (talk) 05:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that is very helpful Karinvanderlaag (talk) 11:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look

Hello Safari, if possible anytime you are free you can take a look at this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nisar Safdar Khan Jadoon. I feel the editor there ain’t understanding my point or politicians are now then suitable for just being elected to a post without WP:GNG. This could be use to judge other politicians and make WP:GNG underrated in that category of politician aspect. Gabriel (……?) 10:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gabriel601, per WP:NPOL a member of a legislative office/rank especially at the national level is considered notable. Jadoon was a member of the Provincial Assembly of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, hence meets the criteria. Throwing more light, it's same as saying that, all members of the Nigerian National House of Assembly are notable as well as the Federal House of Reps. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 15:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rejected draft follow-up

Hi @SafariScribe, I hope you are well. I noticed that you rejected the submission of the improved draft. Link In the new revision I added some new news articles, in-depth book coverage and journals (peer reviewed), but you rejected it for the second time but didn't explain why the new sources are not useful. Could you please explain the reason for rejecting the submission? Regards. 2003:E3:B745:F7A6:256B:90B9:C0AC:90B6 (talk) 16:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In your draft, there are mostly, WP:PRIMARYSOURCES—books and articles written by him—which doesn't show how notable a person can be but are used to verify that the book was written by him. For example, sole book reviews, though should carry the authors name, may standardize recognizing only the impact of the book without the author and then, we will use primary sources to also verify that the author truly wrote the book and most times, the year of publication. We also maintain a high standard for biography of living persons , and all sources should be secondary (newspapers, book reviews, peer reviewed journals and not blogs). Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:35, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SafariScribe,

Thank you for your reply and guidance.

What you are asking is already covered in the current draft.

As per book reviews, I refer you to the following:

Reference 1: https://archive.org/details/dr.-akuma-saningong-my-black-skin/page/n1/mode/2up
Reference 3: https://archive.org/details/akuma-saningong-berufsbilder-biologen-2024/page/90/mode/2up
Reference 4: p. 222. ISBN 978-3-7504-0349-9.
Reference 22: p. 42. ISBN 978-3-86248-615-1.

I refer you to the following peer-reviewed articles:

Reference 12: https://diabetesjournals.org/diabetes/article/58/4/984/105/Functional-Characterization-of-Promoter-Variants (also discussed here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19074982/)
Reference 18: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4327958/
Reference 40: https://febs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1742-4658.2008.06448.x (if you click on the PDF and type in the name of the subject, you will see his poster presentation)
Reference 41: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/biuz.201390008

This is also another peer-reviewed article by the subject that I didn't include in the current draft: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29478084/

I trust this addresses the concerns? 2003:E3:B745:F7A6:256B:90B9:C0AC:90B6 (talk) 14:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will access the sources above later during the day. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 04:18, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @SafariScribe,

I trust this message finds you well.

As per your submission above, you were supposed to check the sources and reply later the same day.

It is now two days and no response from you.

I think you erred in your judgement in rejecting the article, as I have provided you with sufficient evidence that is present in the rejected draft.

I appreciate a quick response from you so that this matter can be dealt with positively and put to rest.

Thank you very much.

Cheers.

🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦

S0091, Klbrain 2003:E3:B745:F7B1:5952:5A60:86B1:FE2F (talk) 22:10, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Above are sources written by him and believe me, they are not going to pass this draft. I have considered as well as removed the rejection template, you may now keep editing. For your initial word, I am not mandated to do anything for you including replying to consideration. I rejected the draft and gave explicit reason. Do you also know that you haven't edited the draft since the rejection? If you have, I could have also remove but there isn't any problem. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:27, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @SafariScribe,

Thank you for your prompt reply. I appreciate it. There was no need to update the draft after the rejection. I asked why you rejected it, and you gave a reason and I replied to you. You gave a generic rejection. And according to the discussion on your talk page here, other editors have cautioned you to slow down your rejection rate. One of your rejections has been overturned. And also for the record, your editorial behaviour is under scrutiny and is being discussed here on Wikipedia. You have also been advised by other editors that it is good practice not to be involved in a case more than once. I have reviewed the archives of the deletion discussion. You were in favour of deleting the page. It was taken down. The article has been rewritten, updated and with more reliable and secondary sources. You still declined it with a generic response. It was updated and you rejected it with a generic response and when politely asked why, you said why and the answers were given to you. Your editorial behaviour on this draft might suggest that you have an undisclosed bias towards the subject. However, this is pure speculation. I stand corrected. Thank you for removing the rejection tag and reclusing yourself from this draft. Much appreciated. Cheers. PS: And your claim that the above resources were written by me is not true. The evidence is there for all to see. They are secondary sources published on editorial websites over which I have no control. 2003:E3:B745:F7B1:5952:5A60:86B1:FE2F (talk) 23:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @SafariScribe,

A little something and a favour from you as I am new here on Wikipedia.

Can you add a tag to the draft that allows me to re-submit it?

Thanks and much appreciated. 2003:E3:B745:F7B1:5952:5A60:86B1:FE2F (talk) 23:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors September Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors September Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below.

Election news: Project coordinators play an important role in our WikiProject. Following the mid-year Election of Coordinators, we welcomed Mox Eden to the coordinator team. Dhtwiki remains as Lead Coordinator, and Miniapolis and Wracking returned as assistant coordinators. If you'd like to help out behind the scenes, please consider taking part in our December election – watchlist our ombox for updates. Information about the role of coordinators can be found here.

Blitz: 13 of the 24 editors who signed up for the June 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 169,404 words comprising 41 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Drive: 38 of the 59 editors who signed up for the July 2024 Backlog Elimination Drive copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 482,133 words comprising 293 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Blitz: 10 of the 15 editors who signed up for the August 2024 Copy Editing Blitz copy edited at least one article. Between them, they copy edited 71,294 words comprising 31 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Drive: Sign up here to earn barnstars in our month-long, in-progress September Backlog Elimination Drive.

Progress report: As of 05:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 233 requests since 1 January, and the backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,824 articles.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we do without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Mox Eden and Wracking.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Message sent by Baffle gab1978 (talk) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:40:48, 11 September 2024 for assistance on AfC submission by Sandeep74236

Sandeep74236 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Sikar Division (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Sandeep74236 (talk) 09:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sandeep74236, I couldn't see any rationale above. Is there anything I can do for you? Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 14:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Billbrod1 (13:12, 11 September 2024)

I want to write an article about a magazine I read regularly --Billbrod1 (talk) 13:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, @Billbrod1. Are you sure that the magazine is notable per our general notability guidelines? If so, it may meets a specific guideline, let's say, WP: NWEBSITE. For an easy way to start writing, please read Help:YFA. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 14:56, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Green's "Around the World in 31 Days" GA Editathon – October 2024

Hello SafariScribe:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2024!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2024, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Grnrchst (talk) & Alanna the Brave (talk)

You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:22, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lorenzo De Stefano

Hi, SafariScribe, how are you? You may have noticed that I've moved this back to draft – it seems to be inadequately sourced, and to my jaded eye has every appearance of WP:UPE. However, I hadn't checked the history carefully enough and had not noticed your acceptance of it, my apologies! Do please go ahead and revert my draftification if you're confident that it should be in mainspace. Thanks, regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLAR article

Hello @SafariScribe, Hi, I'm a paid contributor. I wrote an article by businessman Daniel Vorcaro, it went through the draft, then it was flagged with a tag for review, as they pointed out possible problems in the conflict of interest. But this week, it was deleted and marked as WP:BLAR. I talked to @Qcne, he helped me with some questions and said that, for him, the article gained notoriety, just about. I would like to know why you felt that it does not meet the GNG and if I can do something to reverse this. Thank you for your attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curiapeba (talk • contribs) 17:59, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Curiapeba please always start new discussions at the bottom of a page and WP:sign your comments. I have moved this one and signed it for you. S0091 (talk) 18:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Curiapeba (talk page watcher) thank you for raising this with the editor who reviewed it thus.

It is worth awaiting their answer before deciding on your next action. You are entitled to revert the reviewer's action, and may do it unilaterally. There is a process called WP:BRD which describes this. The usual place for discussion is on the draft or article talk page (the item where the reversion took place). This means the discussion would migrate there if you take this action.

I reiterate that awaiting their reply is useful, though you may do this without waiting if you choose.

I have not looked at the draft, so have only given you technical advice. I have not weighed the merits of the blanked draft., and make no comment upon any notability (not notoriety). 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Curiapeba I should say that you need to abide by WP:PAID in all actions in this regard, lest you face harsh criticism. Obviously not just in this regard, but we are speaking of a specific case. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Curiapeba, welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for asking. I redirected your draft as part of WP:NPP process for patrolling unreviewed articles as well as send articles that doesn't meet WP:GNG or any specific WP:SNG to WP:AFD. I wouldn't talk about the promotional nature of the article but note: being any entrepreneur otherwise a founder of a non notable organization doesn't show notability. It may be called WP:UNDUEWEIGHT, especially when we have a wholly content about the organisation therein. Also, notability is WP:NOTINHERIT. Normally we would redirect to the organization's page if any, but if you insist, I can revert and send to AFD or if you wish to improve your draft, I will draftify it for you. Please don't be discouraged and remember to follow the rules for WP:PAID. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SafariScribe, I gladly accept help in writing and improving the article. How can we proceed? Regarding the rules for WP:PAID, I have already made it clear on my talk page that I am a paid contributor, I have no problems with continuing to comply with these rules. Curiapeba (talk) 20:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Curiapeba be sure you actually do comply. One of the things you did after the article was accepted was to remove a maintenance template stating the article contained paid contributions, which is true; it does contain paid contributions. That was wholly inappropriate and if you/your client are not prepared for others to edit the article, then Wikipedia is not the platform for you/your client. No one owns the article| (read that) and you nor anyone affiliated with Vorcaro should edit the article directly. In addition, being accepted through AfC does not mean an article meets any or all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The whole point of a crowd sourced platform is others contribute which also means no single person (or their proxies) controls it. S0091 (talk) 21:23, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Chan Sze Chi

You declined this with a note that SIGCOV is not met, but as far as I can tell, it is - just looking at the translated titles of all four cited sources suggests that they are about this individual (who is however referred to them as Chen Shiqi and not as Chan Sze Chi.

The article's creator may have trouble properly rendering Chinese names in English, but I don't think RS is an issue here. Can you revisit this? I think it can be published (the person seems notable, and the sources seem be reliable and meet SIGCOV). _{Piotrus at Hanyang| reply here} 05:17, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ofcourse it's partly, a problem of WP:SIGCOV. I just removed unsourced and likewise, promotional unnecessary details, yet I couldn't see the draft meeting WP:GNG. Also, source one points to an error page and may be resolved using the Wayback machine (archive.org). Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:58, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking your input

Hello SafariScribe, If you have the time would you please review the Draft:Jennifer Kumiyama article I just re-submitted for review. I'm especially interested in your thoughts on the tone of the article and the choice/quality of the references. Thank you very much. Best, Jack Tarre. Jack Tarre (talk) 15:23, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will look at Draft:Jennifer Kumiyama. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 18:52, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Ramneek Wayne

@SafariScribe, can i have your feedback on Ramneek Wayne page because it was report by you Ramie.vee (talk) 06:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

and Also CBD news is local news channel of Melbourne, how came theat became unreliable source?

https://www.cbdnews.com.au/bringing-change-to-the-disability-sector/ Ramie.vee (talk) 06:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ramie.vee, why would you write your autobiography here? Didn't you read WP: AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Ignoring that very truth, I have accepted your draft and next, to WP:AFD. Cheers! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This week's article for improvement (week 38, 2024)

Hello, SafariScribe. The article for improvement of the week is:

Polling station

Please be bold and help improve it!

Previous selections: Caroline Islands • Cancel culture

Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot ^talk 00:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • Opt-out instructions[reply]